June 12, 2011

Jewish Ownership of the Big Media

The heads of the major media are almost all Jews. The list below shows the largest American media either wholly owned by Jews, or run by a Jewish CEO. For a full account of the details, look up each individual media in Who Rules America? This list is from 2004, and while details change in time, the overall picture remains the same.

The list above was first composed by Dr. William Pierce (1933-2002). Pierce was a physicist who achieved tenure at Oregon State University at an early age. He taught physics at the university from 1962 to 1965 and took part in government cold-fusion research. He could have stayed at the university, or taken a highly paid job in the private sector. Instead he saw it as his duty to do all he could for the good of others, regardless of personal consequences. He founded his own organization, the National Alliance, dedicated to warning Americans of what he considered the greatest threat of his time: the Jewish control of mass media and therefore politics. In 1973 he testified against Secretary of State nominee Henry Kissinger before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, stating that Kissinger as a Jew would favor the interests of Israel over America.

Dr. Pierce with his cat Hadley, who liked to ride on his shoulder

As Pierce pointed out in his document Who Rules America?, Jews, who make up only 2.5 percent of the U.S. population, have come to a position where they have a near-complete control of both news media and the Hollywood movie industry. The reasons are simple: first, while educated Whites will enter any field that has use for their talents, with the best drawn to industries that produce goods and services that are of practical use to their fellow men, Jews focuse on businesses that influence the public’s opinions – such as media, advertisement, publishing, law, psychiatry, and politics.

Second, while Whites will sell company shares to whoever offers a reasonable price, and follow the philosophy that competence should be the deciding factor in job appointments, Jews will sell only to each other and hire each other to high positions. Whites are more individualistic, Jews are more tribal. In time this has lead to Jewish dominance in the media.

The reason for this is that Jews have lived as a minority among other peoples for at least 3,000 years. In this time those who were ready to assimilate have done so, married non-Jews, and disappeared from the gene pool. This left behind a hard core of Jews with an unusually strong instinct to band together with their race. The instinct has been hardened by rabbis who for centuries taught Jews that they were hated by the “goyim,” the non-Jewish cattle, and must hate them in return.

Dr. Pierce wrote in Who Rules America? that the largest media corporations form an image of the world and then tell us what to think of that image. “Essentially everything we know, or think we know, about events outside our own neighborhood comes to us via our daily newspaper, our weekly news magazine, our radio, or our television.”

In particular the media mold opinions in matters important to Jews. Racial integration and mass immigration in White countries is one such matter. Racial separatism and nationalism for Israel is another. (One standard for Jews, another standard for the rest of us.) Both serve Jewish interests: one by preventing a White majority from throwing them out, as happened in most West European countries during the Renaissance and onward, and the other by providing them a racial base.

A range of acceptable opinions is created, says Dr. Pierce:

As an example, consider the media treatment of Middle East news. Some editors or commentators are slavishly pro-Israel in their every utterance, while others seem nearly neutral. No one, however, dares suggest that the U.S. government is backing the wrong side in the Arab-Jewish conflict, or that 9-11 was a result of that support. Nor does anyone dare suggest that it served Jewish interests, rather than American interests, to send U.S. forces to cripple Iraq, Israel's principal rival in the Middle East. Thus, a spectrum of permissible opinion, from pro-Israel to nearly neutral, is established. (The last sentence has been added to the document after Pierce's death. Otherwise the words belong to Pierce.)

Another example is the media treatment of racial issues in the United States. Some commentators seem almost dispassionate in reporting news of racial strife, while others are emotionally partisan—with the partisanship always on the non-White side. All of the media spokesmen without exception, however, take the position that “multiculturalism” and racial mixing are here to stay and that they are good things.

The difference in degrees makes it seem like there is a choice, which is more efficient than an all-out bias. Likewise, movies and TV shows present a slanted view:

For example, a racially mixed couple will be respected, liked, and socially sought after by other characters, as will a “take charge” Black scholar or businessman, or a sensitive and talented homosexual, or a poor but honest and hardworking illegal alien from Mexico. On the other hand, a White racist—that is, any racially conscious White person who looks askance at miscegenation or at the rapidly darkening racial situation in America—is portrayed, at best, as a despicable bigot who is reviled by the other characters, or, at worst, as a dangerous psychopath who is fascinated by firearms and is a menace to all law-abiding citizens. The White racist “gun nut,” in fact, has become a familiar stereotype on TV shows.

Who Rules America has been revised many times to account for changing conditions, but in the 2004 version – two years after Dr. Pierce’s death – the list of the largest media corporations owned by Jews shows that their influence is enormous. Jews and their supporters will respond to this information in three ways: (1) by immediate censorship if possible; (2) by accusing the questioner of “racism” and “anti-Semitism” and destroying his career; (3) by belittling it.

The third point includes statements such as “Not everyone in the media is a Jew,” “It’s because Jews work hard,” “What does it matter?”, “They have no control over what the public wants to see,” “They can do whatever they want. You can start your own news business if you have a problem with it.” The same people cry bloody murder if someone called a “Nazi,” or a Palestinian, comes even close to a position of influence in U.S. media or government. One standard for Jews, another standard for the rest of us.

Everyone knows that it does matter who sits on the media control; people just won't say it when a side they approve of has the control. Criticizing Jews is also the most forbidden act in the West today - even acknowledging that a powerful person is a Jew is completely forbidden. Jews can only be mentioned as being Jews when they are painted as victims. Like the saying goes: if you want to know who has the power in a society, you need only ask who you cannot criticize.